Suggestion: Modelling survey result

When I build the survey I often try to imagine what kind of result I’ll get. Actually, I just download empty survey list with only qestions and fill it random answers. After filling I build the plots and try to evaluate either it’s usefull or not.

Of course I can evaluate without such doing, just in my mind, but it is not convenient.

Maybe someone else will find it as usefull features and surveygizmo will consider it for a developing plan.

2 answers

This is when piloting and pre-testing come in handy. For all studies I pilot with at n=25 actual respondents before going to full launch. For more complicated and longer term studies n=100 is more of a minimum.

If you work with others, then have them pre-test and pilot the survey with you.

Simulation of data are possible but they are dependent on you knowing the likely distribution of responses. When logic skips are involved and survey timing is critical, this is a big assumption.

To just get data to test reporting, exporting, coding, etc, then the SurveyGizmo Generate Test Responses is of value.

I try to test it on real respondent if I’ve already constructed the survey. But this feature more usefull while building survey, just to see shape of result.

And yes, actually you’re right. That’s true that generator doesn’t know about distribution and also gives you uniform distribution that unusuall for social surveys — it’s more likely to get normal distribution. Anyway, it’s better if we can choose the distribution.

Yes, sorry, I just didn’t notice it. Before it I thought tap “Test” may only tell you about time respondent spends on your poll. Now I see this feature.

It’s quite handy, but it gives me uniform distribution, but talking about polls, normal distribution you can meet more often. So, to continue conversation of suggestion theme, It’s could be better to choose or only to get normal distribution on getting test responses.